Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 10 Wash. App. 355 - State v. Nixon

10 Wash. App. 355 - State v. Nixon’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
1
states following
February 1992
most recently cited

22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently February 1992

22 state decisions

150197319801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Yick Wo v. Hopkins · Oyler v. Boles · Snowden v. Hughes · Spencer v. State of Texas a Bell · Cannon v. United States

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he administration by state officers of a state statute which is fair on its face but which results in an unequal application of the law to citizens is not a denial of equal protection unless there is shown to be present an element of intentional or purposeful discrimination. A discriminatory purpose must be shown clearly by one claiming discrimination since such a purpose cannot be presumed.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Mere selectivity in prosecution creates no constitutional problems; defendant must show deliberate or purposeful discrimination based on an unjustifiable standard such as race, religion, or other arbitrary classification.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[O]ne who alleges discriminatory enforcement must meet the "heavy burden" of showing "conscious, intentional discrimination" . . . or a consciously practiced pattern of discrimination . . . The conscious exercise of some selectivity in enforcement of the law is not in itself a constitutional violation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.